Online Scientific Journal

Modern problems of science and education. Surgery

ISSN 2686-9101

Peer review

«Modern problems of science and education. Surgery» is a peer reviewed journal. All articles are peer-reviewed in a double-blinded process, by at least three researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.

Our team of reviewers includes over 100 experts from many countries. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors,  anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Based on the results of the review, the reviewer gives to the editorial board one of the following recommendations:

- The article can be accepted for publication in the form presented by the author;

- The article can be published after revision by the author in accordance with the comments indicated by the reviewer;

- The article can be published after revision and re-review;

- The final decision must be made after reviewing the article by another specialist;

- The article cannot be published in the journal.

If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial board would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably.

If author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript, he must notified editor about it. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.

If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.

The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.

The positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.